Tag: #TaxLitigations

  • CESTAT Mumbai Orders Interest on Refund of Seized Traveller’s Cheques

    CESTAT Mumbai Orders Interest on Refund of Seized Traveller’s Cheques

    Date: 25.04.2025

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai Bench ruled in favor of M/s Sohail Maklai Entertainment Pvt. Ltd., directing the Customs Department to pay interest on the refund of β‚Ή47.86 lakhs, which was encashed from 106 traveller’s cheques seized back in 2006.

    • On 19.10.2006, Customs officials at CSI Airport, Mumbai seized 106 traveller’s cheques from a passenger.
    • The cheques, amounting to USD $1,07,642 (equivalent to β‚Ή47,86,334), were deposited in the State Bank of India.
    • After prolonged litigation, redemption fine and penalties totaling β‚Ή10.01 lakhs were deducted.
    • The remaining β‚Ή41.85 lakhs was refunded, but no interest was paid on the retained amount.
    • The company sought interest on the refunded amount and alternatively, foreign exchange rate-adjusted compensation.

    Handy Download:

  • CESTAT Kolkata Sets Aside Seizure of Black Pepper & Green Peas

    CESTAT Kolkata Sets Aside Seizure of Black Pepper & Green Peas

    Date: 24.04.2025

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata Bench – Court No. 2, has allowed a batch of six appeals related to the alleged smuggling of black pepper and green peas from Nepal into India, holding that the Revenue failed to prove the foreign origin of the goods and that the seizures conducted at Muzaffarpur constituted “town seizures” without sufficient statutory backing.

    • Based on intelligence reports, officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) intercepted a truck and escort car at Hajipur, Bihar on 28.05.2019.
    • The truck was found carrying 6,718.5 kg of black pepper and 3,918 kg of peas.
    • The Revenue alleged these goods were smuggled from Nepal through Bhimnagar border and lacked legal documentation.

  • CESTAT Ahmedabad Held that value cannot be re-determined on weight when units price were declared and invoiced

    CESTAT Ahmedabad Held that value cannot be re-determined on weight when units price were declared and invoiced

    Date: 23.04.2025

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahmedabad – Court No. 3, has allowed two appeals filed by ISGEC Heavy Engineering Ltd., setting aside penalties and redemption fine imposed by customs authorities on the grounds of alleged misdeclaration of weight in multiple Bills of Entry.

    • The case pertained to import of engineering components including:
      • Carbon Steel Forged Hemi (ASME SA266 GR2)
      • Proof Machined Low Alloy Steel Spool
      • Test Plates
    • Customs claimed excess weight in three shipments totaling over 13.37 MTS more than declared.
    • Alleged misdeclaration valued at approx. β‚Ή31.45 lakhs with total differential duty of approx. β‚Ή9.48 lakhs.

    Handy Reader for Download:

  • CESTAT Mumbai No provision under Customs Act, 1962 empowers officers to collect interest in the absence of duty

    CESTAT Mumbai No provision under Customs Act, 1962 empowers officers to collect interest in the absence of duty

    Date: 23.04.2025

    The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai Bench has allowed the appeal of M/s Lotus Herbals Color Cosmetics, ordering the refund of β‚Ή1,02,818, which was collected as interest without legal authority during EPCG import clearance.

    • The appellant imported a filling machine and parts under Bill of Entry No. 7362042 dated 27.03.2020 at JNPT, Nhava Sheva.
    • At the time of filing, they did not possess an EPCG authorisation, which was later issued on 03.06.2020.
    • Due to the COVID-19 lockdown, the EPCG licence was submitted after some delay.
    • Customs officers allegedly verbally demanded payment of interest for the intervening period.
    • The appellant paid β‚Ή1,02,818 as interest vide challan dated 25.06.2020, and the goods were cleared at nil customs duty under Notification No. 16/2015-Cus.

    Handy Reader for Download:

  • CESTAT Hyderabad Upholds DFIA Exemption on Lithium-Ion Battery Imports

    CESTAT Hyderabad Upholds DFIA Exemption on Lithium-Ion Battery Imports

    Date: 21.04.2025

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Hyderabad Bench – Court No. I has dismissed the Department’s appeal and upheld the exemption granted to M/s Olectra Greentech Ltd. for import of Lithium-ion batteries under a Transferable DFIA (Duty-Free Import Authorisation) scheme.

    • Olectra Greentech imported lithium-ion cells under a DFIA license issued against exports of Agricultural Tractors.
    • The customs department denied the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 25/2023-Cus dated 01.04.2023, stating that lithium-ion batteries do not match the export input description of “automotive batteries.”
    • The Commissioner (Appeals) had earlier ruled in favor of Olectra, prompting a departmental appeal.

    Handy Reader for Download:

  • CESTAT Bangalore set aside the re-determined valuation

    CESTAT Bangalore set aside the re-determined valuation

    Date: 21.04.2025

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Bangalore Bench, has ruled in favor of M/s Saash Enterprises, setting aside a customs order that had rejected the declared transaction value of imported laminators, binding machines, and related equipment. The Tribunal quashed the re-determined valuation, confiscation, penalty, and fine imposed by the lower authorities.

    • The case involved Bill of Entry No. 8730452 dated 11.12.2012 for goods including laminators, wire binding machines, and paper cutters.
    • Although the physical description and quantity of the goods matched the import documentation, the customs authorities questioned the declared value and engaged a Chartered Engineer, who estimated a value of USD 69,021 against the declared USD 55,142.06.
    • Based on this, customs re-valued the consignment to β‚Ή46.43 lakhs (from β‚Ή30.96 lakhs) and imposed:
      • Redemption fine of β‚Ή5,00,000
      • Penalty of β‚Ή2,00,000 under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962

    Handy Reader for Download:

  • CESTAT Kolkata Rejected Customs attempt to apply two different transaction values

    CESTAT Kolkata Rejected Customs attempt to apply two different transaction values

    Date: 18.04.2025

    The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Kolkata Bench (Court No. 2) has dismissed the Revenue’s appeal against M/s Kiran Trading Company, thereby upholding the order of the Commissioner (Port), Kolkata, which had dropped proceedings initiated under a DRI show cause notice.

    1. The Revenue appealed against the Order-in-Original dated 23.10.2018, which dropped charges of mis-declaration of value and evasion of Anti-Dumping Duty (ADD) on imports of Chinese-origin Melamine by M/s Kiran Trading Company. ​
    2. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) alleged over-invoicing to evade ADD, based on investigations and analysis of import patterns.

    Handy Reader for Download: